|
|
The upcoming decision on the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate oversight will render an opinion of the very basics of the United States Constitution. The Constitution gives legislative or law-making ability exclusively to the legislative branch of government. The executive and judicial branches are granted different duties but have no authority to make law.
This case deals with the executive branch issuing primarily regulations, but it will also apply to executive orders, that are deemed to be law. The legislative branch has contributed to this problem as they have in the past passed a law in concept and then told the executive branch to fill in the blanks. That is unconstitutional. SCOTUS, if it agrees with those bringing the case, will be declaring it unlawful for federal agencies to make “major” decisions without clear authorization from Congress. SCOTUS will be declaring that Congress must fulfill its constitutional duties of making law as it declares that the executive branch cannot make law. “Congress did not — and, under our Constitution, cannot — grant unelected administrative officials at EPA legislative power to creatively reimagine energy policy for the entire country,” states a legal brief by the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. SCOTUS has the opportunity to state that indeed we are a Constitutional Republic and not a democracy. That means that we must live by what the Supreme Ruler of the land says, that is the United States Constitution, and not concoct new rules that make democracy or dictatorship easier. If the court rules in favor of the Constitution and freedom, this ruling will apply to all aspects of the executive branch including the NIH, HUD, DOJ, Department of Education, the Department of Agriculture, that is the entire executive branch. It should also be extended to the judicial branch. The judicial branch has no legal authority to make law. SCOTUS did make law when it ruled on Roe vs Wade. A court that not only gives opinions on the Constitution, but adheres to the Constitution, would have declared that Roe v Wade was an issue for the states or for Congress and would have refused to issue the inane ruling it did. Let us hope this ruling comes down on the side of the Constitution and freedom, and not on the side of democracy and dictatorship.
0 Comments
First of all, when I say that I am an Individualist that means that I believe each individual must have the right and the responsibility to live their own life, make their own choices, and have their own thoughts. I believe in the John Locke ideas of natural law and individual liberties. Simply put, it means that each of us have the right to life, liberty, and property, but my right ends when I deprive others of that same right. In today’s world that would mean for instance that my right to life ends when I deprive an unborn child of their right to life, my right to free speech and thought ends when I deprive that right to others, and my right to property ends when I infringe on your right to your property.
In a collectivist society, everything for which I stand as an individualist is negated. The collectivist believes that we as individual persons are simply a clog in a greater machine and our purpose is to contribute to what the collectivist would call the “greater good.” If it is for the “greater good” that I kill my unborn child, than I must. If it is for the “greater good” that I think only as I am told, than I must. If it is for the “greater good” that I own nothing that I can call my own, but all is shared as I am directed, than I must own nothing. America was founded on the principle of individualism. We are the first country that was founded on that principle. We are unique because America meant that our individual liberties such as life, liberty, and property, came for our Creator and not from government. We were also founded as a Republic and not a Democracy. That means that the powers of our government were specifically limited, and the liberties of the people were unlimited but subject to the rules of “natural law”. Now for the random thoughts. Dictators arise because of the propensity of people to need a hero they place on a pedestal. It is the true stateman that understands this weakness in people and refutes this dangerous adoration. We saw this with George Washington. What a statesman. He could have declared himself King, Emperor, or Czar. Any meaningful opposition would have been that his monarchy could not be hereditary. Washington took the position that America was not his, but it was a nation where the people must be the sovereign and the government must be the servant. Washington chose to serve as a servant and not a sovereign. We hear comments from both the right and the left that this is Trump’s America. Those on the right applaud and those on the left sneer. Trump has stated many times that America is not his, but his purpose is to return America to the people. This is what the right applauds, and this is what the left fears. We are given reports on Trump’s endorsements in the primaries. It is my belief that, like the media always does, the meaning of these endorsements is exaggerated. I am sure in a few races and in limited circumstances they have been the direct difference, but Laxalt would have won the race in Nevada without endorsements from anybody. The real news should be, is the candidate a dedicated individualist or a dedicated collectivist. The news always wants to take one isolated race and declare that it is a harbinger of the future. In most situations, the outcome of any individual race can only be measured as an isolated incident in a specific time and at a specific place. However, the Mayra Flores victory is telling. The seat was vacated by a Democrat. I assume because the Biden regime and Pelosi believed it to be very safe for the collectivists. It had been since 1872 and is heavily populated by what Biden and Pelosi considered strong supporters. Flores, an individualist won the race and will now be in the house. This could be a harbinger. We who are individualists must understand however, that the collectivists will and have done anything to keep power including stealing the 2020 election. This has to be a warning to them that they must up their game in stealing elections. I hear people constantly say they only get their news from certain outlets. How foolish. If you do that you are missing some news. Also, you are receiving the news from a slanted perspective, yes from your perspective, but anybody who is searching for knowledge, must search from all perspectives. By getting different perspectives, you learn if your perspective is correct and if so, it strengthens your beliefs. The collectivist movement believes in total conformity to the beliefs of the elites, and total equality for the masses. It has been the strategy of the collectivist to employ indoctrination and propaganda, and then use intimidation to enforce their ideology. For equality of the masses, the collectivists have argued that the producers, those who accomplish, the innovators, and the ambitious are dangerous to collectivism. They have stated that this group, or the rich, must pay their “fair share” in taxes so the collectivist elites can spread it to the others. Biden has recently claimed that the cause of inflation is that “the rich are not paying their fair share”. When asked what a fair share is, we receive the standard answer that they do not have a specific amount but what the rich are now paying is not a fair share. The collectivist movement did define “fair share”. They want us to forget that definition. I can not nor will I. Franklin Roosevelt defined “fair share’ in April of 1942 when he asked congress to pass a law to make the rich pay their “fair share”. FDR said that “fair share” would be 100% of all taxable income over $25,000. That would be about $450,000 today. The collectivist mind set would ask why anybody but them needs more than $450,000. That they say, would be a “fair share” for all but the collectivist elite, who should not be taxed at all because of the great contribution they are making to the “greater good”. I am an individualist. I read and have read many books advocating for collectivism. I have read much about the results of collectivism. I have read much history. I have read a few novels like “Atlas Shrugged” and “War and Peace”. Tolstoy was a remarkable author. The more I read, the more convinced I am that individualism brings freedom and prosperity, and collectivism brings conformity and poverty for the masses. Individualism requires a moral society organized as a republic, and collectivism requires a democracy, which is as Lenin said, “indispensable to socialism, which is the gateway to communism”. Yes, our nation is divided. Our nation was divided during the First and Second Continental Congress. Our nation was divided during the Constitutional Convention. Our nation has been divided all of its existence. But never has our nation been as divided as it is today.
The divisions we saw in our earlier history were different from the divisions we see today. The divisions we saw in our earlier history were differences of process and not of ends. In our earlier history Americans overwhelmingly understood that the power of government must be limited, and the liberties of the individual must be protected. The argument about powers of government was how do we give government the appropriate power to protect our borders and our liberties, but not have the power to tell the individual how they must live their lives, choices they must make, thoughts they could have, or how could we give government power to perform only the proper functions of government and not be able to become tyrannical. Americans were overwhelmingly individualists. The Constitution of the United States is all about limiting the power of government and protecting the liberties of the people. This is the reason we have three not co-equal, but three independent branches of government. The Judicial Branch of government was always intended to be the weakest branch and the Legislative Branch was intended to be the most powerful. The reasoning was that the Judicial Branch was the farthest removed from the people and the Legislative Branch was the closest to the people. Our Constitution specifically states what powers the federal government would have. This is not a suggestive list of powers, but it is a definitive and limiting list of powers. The list is in Article 1. Section 8 of the Constitution. The 10th amendment reinforces that the powers of government are limited to only those powers as it states that any powers not listed are given to the states and the people. The Constitution also specifically states that the federal government cannot infringe or abridge liberties of the people. Congress, the executive, and the courts do not have the power to take from the people our liberties. Many of these liberties are listed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The framers stated however, in the 9th amendment, that all liberties are protected from government, not just those specifically listed. This was the intent and goal of the different factions in our early history. This has changed. In our nation today we still have a large number of people who believe the power of government should be limited and the liberties of the people should be protected. But since the beginning of the 20th century, a faction has emerged that has as its end goal to have unlimited government power and infringed, abridged, and even abolished liberties. This is the core belief of the collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat, -all the same) movement. Our country is divided today not on process as to what will keep us the most free, but on will we be free, or slaves to government. The American left or collectivists are telling us that our future lies in having the government as sovereign and the people as slaves. The individualists understand that freedom and prosperity are the direct result of individualist policies and that our history is proof. Each American must ask themselves if they want to be free or be a slave. To be free requires that each individual be responsible, be self-reliant, understand that good or bad consequences are the result of their choices, each individual must think for themselves seeking knowledge and not be a willing conformist to indoctrination, propaganda, and intimidation. The choice to be a slave is simple. There is no required responsibility, government reliance is mandatory, and conforming to the dictates and demands of what is known as the woke culture is to be accepted and considered wise. The requirement of the slave is that they simply be compliant and conform to whatever they are told including things such as God does not exist and if God does exist it does not matter because God is irrelevant, that perversions of any kind are good, that gender is a matter of choice, that any evil in the name of conformity is admirable, that violence in the name of conformity is admirable, that all who hold to the truths of the Bible are vile and evil and must be eliminated, and you know the others. Will you take the easy road and submit to the evil of collectivism, or will you take the difficult road and say and mean as did Patrick Henry, “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”? I have made my choice as did Joshua, Stephan, and Patrick Henry, and that is to follow Christ and demand freedom. There is no middle ground. What is your choice? Sanders is listed as an Independent and he calls himself a Democratic Socialist. The policies Sanders has always promoted have been collectivist polices. Remember, collectivism is an ideology that embraces all of the evils of Marxism, communism, socialism, and progressives. It is the essence of, it is the heart of the Democrat Party. Sanders has always caucused with like minded collectivists which means he has always caucused with the Democrats.
Sanders had some words for his fellow collectivists this weekend that prove Sanders is more dedicated to collectivism than he is to the United States or to any political party. Sanders said that without a course correction, he sees the Democratic Party, or the collectivists, on track to get shellacked this fall. Sanders said in an interview last week: “You really can’t win an election with a bumper sticker that says: ‘Well, we can’t do much, but the other side is worse.’” Sanders gave a solution when he stated, “Say to the American people: ‘Look, we don’t have the votes to do it right now. We have two corporate Democrats who are not going to be with us.’” “The leadership has got to go out and say we don’t have the votes to pass anything significant right now. Sorry. You got 48 votes. And we need more to pass it. That should be the message of this campaign.” Sanders was referring to Manchin and Sienna. He was saying to the collectivists that they must follow the way of all collectivists and remove any, in any way, that do not adhere to the collectivist movement. Other tyrannical collectivists also understood this concept. In truth, those in the Republican Party who disagree with the America First movement, which is a movement to return to a Constitutional Republic and restore the limits on the power of government and return all liberties to the people, is determined to punish, and remove any who disagree with those like Cheney and Kinzinger. If Sanders is correct, and the Democrats lose the majority in both houses, the American First movement will not have necessarily been victorious. The America First movement is a movement that places the best interest of the American people and our nation before a political party, before their own power, and way before the deep state entrenched in our bureaucracy. Sanders said that those who do not agree with the ends of their movement, that is control by the government over the lives, choices, and thoughts of the people, must be removed. For the America First movement to be victorious they must remove from their leadership any who place the party’s interest and their own interest above the good of the American people and the nation. That means that the Republicans must replace both McConnell and McCarthy who put the interests of the deep state and their own interests before the American people. They are both skillful politicians but are not statesmen nor dedicated adherents to the America First movement. If the members of the newly elected house and senate, will become dedicated to the ideals upon which our nation was founded and flourished, they will select America First leaders. That would not be McConnell or McCarthy. How dd Samuel Adams bring about the American Revolution? Remember, many in the colonies were indifferent to freedom just as are many Americans today. Remember, many in the colonies supported the tyranny of the King just as many Americans support government tyranny today. Remember, many in the colonies feared independence because it required responsibility and accountability just as do many in America today. Remember, many in the colonies believed the lies of the tyrannical King that his control brought security and safety just as do many in America today believe the lies of government.
Samuel Adams faced the same obstacles that Freedom Loving Americans face today, and that is the indifference and ignorance of an indoctrinated group. Many in this group truly believe that collectivism, or government control over the lives, choices, and thoughts of the people is superior to each individual being responsible and accountable for their own lives, choices, and thoughts. Samuel Adams, a true believer in the benefits of individualism, did not let the intimidation of the collectivists deter him from his proper mission. Samuel Adams, the champion of “Setting Brushfires of Freedom” told us that we must be a part of that irate and tireless group fighting for liberty, and we must be about “Setting Brushfires of Freedom.” People who oppose a society where the powers of government are limited and the liberties of the people are not infringed or abridged, do so because of one or two reasons. The first reason is because they have been indoctrinated, believe the propaganda, and fear the intimidation of the collectivist movement. The second reason is because they are true collectivists who believe absolute control over all will result in a society of total harmony. True collectivists include Marx, Lenin, Hitler, Castro, Mao, Wilson, Obama, and Soros. Those who are members of the first reason, would include most if not all Democrats, and many RINO’s in the United States today. It is to this group that we must target our efforts as “Setting Brushfires of Freedom.” It is the responsibility of each Freedom Loving American to understand the evils of collectivism and why individualism enabled the United States to become the free and prosperous nation it was. We are not being transformed and consequently are less free and less prosperous as a nation because of that transformation. The collectivist believes that all institutions of an individualist nation must be destroyed. This is the final paragraph of the “Communist Manifesto”. “The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.” The forcible overthrow means the use of violence. Marx also stated that despotic means would be necessary and must be used. You now can understand why the Democrat Party supports and promotes riots, looting, arson and even assassination. Marx said that to bring about the harmonious society that collectivists would have us believe is the product of total conformity and equality, it is necessary to eliminate private property. He also said that there are other individualist institutions that must be destroyed. Included in this group are the Family, Individuality, Eternal Truths, Nations, and History. This will help you understand many of the desired ends of the policies of the Democrat Party. Lenin told the Democrat Party how to implement these policies and how to seize control of a society in “Manuel to Seize Control of a Society.” “Corrupt the youth and give them absolute sexual freedom. Infiltrate and take control of the mass communication media. Divide the population into antagonist groups; encourage arguments between them over social issues. Destroy the people’s confidence in their leaders. Talk all the time bout democracy and republic, but when the opportunity arises, seize power as a dictator. Cooperate with the drainage of public funds; discrediting the image of the country, especially overseas, and create panics within the population through the launching of an inflationary process. Encourage strikes, even if they are illegal, in the country’s key industries. Promote riots while conspire to prevent intervention by law enforcement. Cooperate actively in destroying the moral foundations of society and honesty and trust in the government’s promises. Infiltrate other parties with your own people, forcing them to vote for what is useful to your own party’s interest. Register everyone who has firearms, in order to confiscate them when the time comes, preventing them from opposing your revolution.” You now know the actual platform of the Democrat Party. Never has the movement promoted by the Democrat Party, the collectivist or communist movement, brought harmony. It has always resulted in government tyranny and abolishing individual liberty and opportunity. Oppression, poverty, and misery has always been the result. If you are an American who believes the power of government must be limited and the liberties of the people are not to be infringed or abridged, you must understand the above and use them to ask questions when “Setting Brushfires of Freedom.” Ask your family, friends, and acquaintances for instance if the believe the powers of government should have restrictions and limitations and if so to explain. Ask your family, friends, and acquaintances if violence and despotism should be supported and promoted, and if so when and to what extent. Ask your family, friends, and acquaintances if they believe private property should be eliminated and the family should be destroyed, and if so what would be the result. You can move on from here, but remember, nobody likes to be told that they are wrong. Do not tell these people they are wrong, ask the questions, plant the seed, be about “Setting Brushfires of Freedom.” Samuel Adams brought about an historic revolution “Setting Brushfires of Freedom,” and we can restore our Constitutional Republic if we will become as irate, and tireless as was Samuel Adams. Red Flag laws are used to disarm people who another person claims could be dangerous to themselves and/or others. The Red Flag law process begins when a law enforcement official, family member, or household member petitions a state court to temporarily remove firearms from someone they believe to be a danger to themselves or others. In some states, the list of eligible petitioners can include school officials, health care workers, or even coworkers! A judge can issue a warrant allowing law enforcement officials to search the accused’s property and confiscate weapons, sometimes without any prior notice.
This law is in direct conflict with the Constitution of the United States. In a democracy, it is lawful because the majority or those in power deemed it appropriate. In a republic the supreme law of the land or the Constitution protect the due process rights of the individual. This type of hunch, or “get you” laws that deny individual liberties have a history. China launched a hotline recently to target online comments that defame the ruling Chinese Communist Party or question its account of history. This program allows internet users to report on others who spread "mistaken opinions" online in order to create a "good public opinion atmosphere," the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) said in a notice. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is now paying citizens of Communist China to spy on each other, offering rewards of more than 100,000 yuan ($15,000) for tips on national security breaches. In 1933, the Nazis issued a decree that required Germans to turn in anyone who spoke against the party, its leaders, or the government That decree, “For the Defense against Malicious Attacks against the Government,” stated: Whoever purposely makes or circulates a statement of a factual nature which is untrue or grossly exaggerated or which may seriously harm the welfare of the Reich or of a state, or the reputation of the National government or of a state government or of parties or organizations supporting these governments, is to be punished, provided that no more severe punishment is decreed in other regulations, with imprisonment of up to two years and, if he makes or spreads the statement publicly, with imprisonment of not less than three months. Stalin’s Soviet Union Stalin set about building a new universe, in which every old loyalty to kin, friends, colleagues was extinguished and replaced by one fealty alone - to "The People", of whose interests he was sole arbiter. To justify oppression and savagery, the State needed enemies. If they did not exist, they had to be invented, through a system of informers which eventually embraced at least one in ten of Russia's citizens. "The mildest and at the same time the most widespread form of betrayal was not to do anything directly," in the words of the great writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, "but just not to notice the doomed person next to one." "They had arrested a neighbor, your comrade at work, or even your close friend. You kept silence. You acted as if you had not noticed." Every apartment block, every village, every collective, every factory had its corps of official informers who, to justify their existence and often to survive themselves, needed a steady flow of denunciations. The victims often had no clue what "crime" they had committed. They were merely shipped to the Gulag, where they slaved until hunger, disease or execution ended their sufferings. And now we come to the Democrats United States of America. Red Flag Laws, enemies of the people, racists, White Supremacists, insurgents, are no longer protected by the United States Constitution because the majority or those in power proclaim the danger to be greater than the need to protect the liberties of each individual. The Democrats are transforming our republic to a democracy which is what China has, and Germany and Russia had. Welcome to the world of democracy. Samuel Adams told the American Colonists in words that are more applicable today than when Adams delivered them, “It is high time the people of this country explicitly say whether they will be free, or they will be slaves.”
At the time Adams said this, the American Colonists were slaves to a tyrannical government. The British government was telling the colonist how they must live, what choices they must make, and how they must think. This is what the Government of the United States is doing today; it is telling the American Citizen how they must live, what choices they must make, and how they must think. This is the very government that was established after the American Colonist explicitly said free. Today, the American Left is using that government to enslave the American Citizens. American Citizens, do you choose free or slaves? The American Left has followed the same pattern collectivists have followed in the past to enslave populations. We must understand that the goal of collectivism is to enslave populations. Collectivism is an ideology that professes total harmony within a society can be achieved when all people conform to one way of thinking, and all are equal socially, politically, and economically. Although collectivism has been tried throughout the ages, it has always failed. It has failed because people were created to be individuals. Individuals are not identical in any way. We all have different talents, thoughts, desires, and ambitions. Our founders recognized this and founded our nation as an individualist nation. The collectivist movement has been trying to transform our nation to a collectivist nation for 250 years. The collectivist movement has used indoctrination, propaganda, and intimidation to enslave different populations. They insist on indoctrination because it teaches people what to think and not how to think. The collectivist movement insists on total conformity in thought. The collectivist movement has always been experts in the use of propaganda. Propaganda is a term used to describe artful lying. Skilled propagandists are experts at word manipulation and use the emotions of fear and hate to divide societies. A divided people are always easier to manipulate. The collectivist will use what ever means is necessary to intimidate people into obeying. Lenin said to his enforcers that they must go into villages and publicly hang or shoot 100 people to gain the attention of all. If the enforcer was unwilling to do this, the enforcer would be one of the 100. The Democrats today are telling Americans that if you speak the truth for instance, that the 2020 election was stolen, you will be thrown into solitary confinement indefinitely. All constitutionally guaranteed Due Process will be denied to you because you are, according to them, a nonconformist and thus an enemy of the people. If you are an American Citizen who chooses freedom rather than slavery. You must understand that you will be ridiculed, ostracized, demonized, and worse. If you are not willing to stand tall and proclaim truthfully and forcefully, in the manner of a Samuel Adams or a Patrick Henry, your dedication to freedom is suspect. Are you willing to proclaim and embrace the words and the meaning of that incredible proclamation of Patrick Henry, “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” The American Colonists who proclaimed freedom, restated this famous proclamation, and more importantly lived its meaning. They were dedicated to freedom. I am willing to and have made this same proclamation. Yes, I understand the meaning. I also understand that life under collectivism. When the collectivist demands it is their right and duty to declare how I live my life, what choices I must make, and how I must think. it means I must denounce Jesus Christ and embrace the gods of secularism, that I must submit to being the subject for their health experiments, and that I must think absurdities like men can have babies, that sexual perversion is normal and desired, that favoring people because of the color of their skin is not racism but compassion, and that good is evil and evil is good. I, like Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry, choose freedom and understand that freedom always has a cost to it. To choose slavery is simple, if you have no principles and are easily indoctrinated, believe propaganda, and easily succumb to intimidation. There are important issues to watch in primaries. The news would like us to believe that the Democrat Party will lose in the November elections. The generic ballot polls would indicate this to be the situation.
What we must closely watch is how will the left manipulate and steal votes. That they will is a foregone conclusion. They have committed voter fraud for decades. We also watched them become more and more brazen. The 2020 election was an “in your face” steal. As the returns were being tabulated, and it was evident that Biden would be defeated in a landslide, the Democrats closed the counting in some key states and when they were opened, the huge leads Trump had accumulated were gone. There were no logical reasons for this except that the vote counting machines were manipulated by servers from outside the United States. This has been proven beyond any doubt. Unfortunately, many who want us to believe that they are Constitutionalists, deny the obvious, because they do not want to surrender the power base they have in the “deep state”, that very “deep state” Trump was exposing. This brings us to the second real issue. Even if the Republicans gain in the House and the Senate to the point where they have the type of majorities some are claiming they will have, have they won anything. I would describe winning by the Republicans as having true Constitutional believing conservatives in charge. This would mean that Coolidge, Goldwater, and Reagan Republicans would be in control of the House and the Senate. These conservatives have fundamental beliefs. They understand that the best government is government that governs least. They understand that centralized power always becomes tyrannical. They understand that a dollar kept in the private sector is multiple times more productive than a dollar given to government. They understand that collectivist “compassion” is a euphemism for a means to enslave and control. We must be aware of the cheating left. It is who they are. Will they be more or less brazen as they again commit voter fraud? We must be sure to elect Constitutional Conservatives who have the same limited government values that Coolidge, Goldwater, and Reagan had. The current Republican leadership, McConnell and McCarthy are both big government advocates and detest the values of Coolidge, Goldwater, and Reagan. Both McConnell and McCarthy must be removed from any leadership positions, or the victory will be a paper victory only. We have seen this exact thing happen before in the Senate under McConnell. McCarthy is another Boehner and Ryan. If we overcome the corrupt left who believes that the ends always justify the means, and capture the House and Senate, let us insist on having a victory by putting both McConnell and McCarthy out to pasture. We debate the emotional issue and not the issue of how we wish to be governed. The issue we are discussing, and the solutions given concerning controls on weapons are exactly why we were given a Constitutional Republic. Laws made based on emotion and expediency will lead to more government controls and less freedom. This is exactly what our founders told us must not happen if the nation is to remain free from the tyranny of government.
During his two terms as President, Thomas Jefferson detected some evil and subversive trends which were luring the American people away from the original Constitution. Notice how direct he was in pointing the finger of accusation at the judiciary for corrupting the original constitutional plan: "Our government is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit, by consolidation first, and then corruption.... The engine of consolidation will be the federal judiciary; the two other branches the corrupting and corrupted instruments." In other words, the Supreme Court uses its judicial mandates to draw more and more power to Washington; then the Congress and the Executive use this new power to shatter the Constitution and corrupt the dual federalism which was designed to balance the political powers between the government and the states. Once Jefferson's distant cousin, John Marshall, became chief justice of the Supreme Court, Marshall set himself and his associates up as the "final arbiter" on all constitutional issues. Nowhere in the Constitution was the federal judiciary given the power to enforce its will on the states or the other two federal departments. Jefferson had the Supreme Court in his gun sights when he wrote: "The great object of my fear is the federal judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting with noiseless foot and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step and holding what it gains, is engulfing insidiously the [state] governments into the jaws of that [federal government] which feeds them." Marshall was as wrong in what he did as are those who have brought about restrictions on citizens arming themselves and those who are calling for more restrictions or completely taking away the Constitutionally declared right. Neither Marshall nor the people calling for 2nd Amendment limitations are advocates for a Constitutional Republic. What Marshall practiced and what the 2nd Amendment opponents are advocating is for tyranny under the rules of democracy. That is that the majority or those in power have the right to declare anything as law they perceive to be proper for whatever reason they say justifies their tyrannical rule. The Constitution of the United States was to be the Supreme Ruler. Supreme Rulers have the right to change their mind. Our Constitution can and has changed its mind. It did so every time it was amended. This is how Marshall should have approached his ruling rather than rely on the forces of tyranny. This is how the 2nd Amendment opponents should be approaching their calls for change. The Supreme Ruler of our land or the Constitution specifically states how the people can change the mind of the Supreme Ruler. Article V The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. This is the process Marshall should have used and this is the process the 2nd Amendment opponents should use. Any other way is subverting the Constitution and the rule of law and resorting to tyranny. Steve Scalise said he does not support legislation on red flag laws, calling them “unconstitutional” and a non-solution to a broader debate on how to curb gun violence.
Scalise told “Fox News Sunday” host John Roberts that red flag laws, implemented in 19 states across the U.S., are unconstitutional because authorities violate a Second Amendment right to bear arms when they seize firearms from an individual a court deems is a threat. “They literally come into your house and take away your gun without you even knowing that there was some kind of proceeding where somebody said, ‘Oh, I think that gun might be a threat,'” the lawmaker said. “Maybe somebody thought taking away a gun from a 19-year-old is going to solve a problem. It happens to be unconstitutional.” Steve Scalise is correct. Red Flag laws violate the Constitution of the United States. America’s Founders understood clearly that private property is the foundation not only of prosperity but of freedom itself. Thus, through the common law, state law, and the Constitution, they protected property rights — the rights of people to acquire, use, and dispose of property freely. The Constitution protects property rights through the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments’ Due Process Clauses. This would be important if we were still a Republic. Remember, in a republic the law is the Supreme Ruler. In a Constitutional Republic the Constitution is the Supreme Ruler. In a republic, laws could not be made that would violate the Supreme Ruler or in our case the United States Constitution. Red flag laws are clearly unconstitutional. However, the United States has been transformed by the American Marxist movement, which is now centered in the Democrat party, from a Constitutional Republic to a democracy. In a democracy, the majority or those in power are the Supreme Ruler. The only limitations they have are those they place upon themselves. Since the United States is no longer a Constitutional Republic, the limitations, and restrictions the Constitution places on government, the majority or those in power no longer apply. In a democracy, if the majority or those in power declare that because a person believes you owning a gun is dangerous and because of that complaint the state can take your gun, so be it. This is how democracy works. Yes, in a democracy, anything could be substituted for gun. Your neighbor could declare that they believed you had subversive tendencies, make a complaint to the government authorities, and you could be placed in jail. Does this happen in societies. Oh yes it does. It happens in virtually all totalitarian societies. Most recently in the collectivist’s states of Russia, later to be the Soviet Union, Mussolini’s Italy, Hitler’s Germany, Castro’s Cuba, the CCP’s China, and most recently in the Democrats United States. The Supremacy of the majority or those in power is critical to a totalitarian democracy. This is why the founders insisted that we by a Constitutional Republic where the majority or those in power are restricted and limited, and the liberties of the people are protected and can not be infringed or abridged. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
October 2023
Categories |
RSS Feed